Lifter bore and valve relocation questions.

I've been contemplating this, and hopefully someone can shed
some light on this for me. Question 1: Is it possible to enlarge the lifter
bore diameter (while reinforcing the block area) to run a larger
BB Ford or Chrysler tappet? Reason being, with a wider lifter, a more aggressive (higher lift) cam lobe profile could be ground onto a Buick cam core, while keeping overall cam duration relatively short compared to
an .842 lifter with equal lift. Second question: Is it feasible, with
430 heads, to plug and relocate the intake valve guides to run say
a 2.225" valve? Sounds a bit radical, but my mind sorta works weird that way.
If this question is waaay outta the ball park, feel free to can it. Many thanks
for any insight, John.

 

John, good question.

Unforunately the big block Buick's castings are problematic already with what we have, especially so with core shift. I've not heard of anyone running larger diameter lifters.

Others will chime in hopefully.

Devon

 

Some years ago,Kenne-Bell experimented with mushroom lifters which basicly did the same thing as larger diameter lifters without boring the lifter bore.The lifters had to be installed from the bottom.I never ran them but I knew of 2 motors near me that did,and the gain was minimal.
gary

 

I did this and have not had a problem for 8 years I think that I used big block ford had to change the lifter guts to make it work.Been a long time but if I remember right I but G.M.lifter guts in to them. DAVE

 

As for valve relocation a stock Buick head intake port's minimum cross sectional area will be the limiting factor for head flow. On a stock head (all years) this is just after the pushrod pinch just before the short side radius. Even a big port head (that is the biggest) ported to the max the intake's min. cross sectional area is way short of a se TA head where the min. cross sectional area is actually the runner itself rather than the pushrod pinch. There was a post where even on a highly ported TA TE raised intake port head flowing big #'s anything over 2.19" did not net a gain due to the 455 bore size.
Not to say you may not get some gain but it is alot less work/coin to go with what's proven. I would either use properly ported stock heads with stg1 valves (there is quite few threads on this to DIY) or go TA aluminum heads with professional porting/valve size for the application. But that's just MO.
Edelbrock has some heads on the market too but have yet to work on one so I have no opinion on them.
Ray

 

Many thanks for the replies. I have a great set of ported 430
heads on the car, but have 4 or more sets out in the tool shed.
Several are cracked between the spring pads, and I was staring
at 'em one day wondering what if. Realizing that there is around
300 cfm flow potential (for the intake side) pretty much dismisses
the reason to do it I suppose anyway. Thanks again. Great forum,
by the way. Should have signed up a long time ago!

 

It's been a while, but it seems to me Crower used to offer
mushroom lifters. Sure makes it a pain to do an in-car cam
change, doesn't it?!

 

A couple of Buick guys here had a iron head intake ported( just the one port) and a 2.19 valve in it and it did flow 300.
I'm not advising you to go this route just telling the info i saw.
Jamie

 

It seems to me that it would be possable to enlarge the lifter bores. The major thing I can think of is that you will need to keep them in a stright line.

A friend of mine has the jig to put lifter bore liners in a BBC for his milling mechine that cost him $2500.00

I am just saying it can be done for the right money.

For the heads:

That sounds like something TA does with it's stage three and four heads (off set valve guides) to be able to install larger valves in their heads.

 

Yes, and apparently that was somewhat of a disappointment, with only minimal gain.

 

If you are going to spend that much time and money for somthing that might work or not. why not just buy an aluminium block. stage 3 and 4 heads valves are moved but provides minimal gain because bore is to small.

 

I've refinanced once, and if I did it again for the block (and
what the heck) a set of heads, she'd leave me. Which would
give me more spending money for the car. I could cure painted
parts in the oven again. Or use the dish washer to clean parts.
And build engines in the spare bedroom again. Hmmmmm.........

 

I have an NOS KB mark7m cam and NOS mushroom lifters.
Lifters are Engle brand. And seem pretty lite, although I have not weighed them yet.

Cam specs are .643/.643 and 288/288
The lobes look just like a roller cam...

 

Another idea for the machinist gurus(hopefully not a thread jack. Just more to chew on.

Is there enough MATERIAL with a lifter bore brace of course, to open up the lifter bores and bush them for Chevy size lifters.

Reason= Everyone knows roller lifters are available for the Buick. But for us budget guys, if it was possible to bush the bores and drill the proper size metering hole in the bushing, couldn't you get around needing shrouded rollers and then be able to use dime a dozen Chevy roller lifter, which is lighter and more common in case of breakage at the track.

Just bouncing ideas around. You really don't want to hear that I called New Century( I got offered a RAGING STEAL of a deal on a BBC 4.84 bore space shortblock) about whether boring one of their blocks and offsetting the sleeves to make them Buick 4.75 bore space was possible.

Reason= BBC race bottom end durability with Buick power producing top end. I know it'd be a hybrid but the power making stuff would be Buick. Just love that 3000hp capable CHEAP (for this deal) reliability and parts, once again, availability.

 

If you bush the bore you cut off oil to the main...

 

You think if he charges over $500.00 to do this, he has thought of that?

The guy I know that does it has made a engine out of a big block of aluminum.

I think he knows his stuff.

 

I have my machinist do this all the time, bore the lifter bores for the .843 o/d Ford lifters. I see NO reason to bore and bush a lifter bore, only make 'em fit a slightly larger lifter.

I learned this from Dave Ray, when he did my first 215 engine.

Regards,

Milton

 

I understand that. But, isn't the problem with roller lifters in a Buick the issue with bleeding oil pressure due to the open roller wheel. Hence the need for a shrouded roller lifter to cure the problems. When I suggest bushing the bores for a Chevy lifter would drilling the proper size metering hole in the bushing to control this bleed off not work?

Just curious. I understand machining and the steps for a Buick, but this has always baffled me. Am I missing something on the way the lifter is fed?

 

Chevrolets run an .842 lifter, just like the Buicks.. I have used Chev lifters in a 455 many times.

As far as roller lifters.. well, they don't make Buick roller lifters... just like they don't really make Buick solid lifters.

What has been used in the past is derivatives out of the parts book, of other make lifters..

Stock blocks require a fully shrouded roller lifter, or you will uncover the main galley with a big lift roller, and bleed of a ton of oil pressure.

There is no cheap easy way to get around the facts of life, when it comes to a roller cam in a BBB.. with the iron block. It's expensive.

The TA block will open up a whole host of new possiblities, but the words "budget" and "aluminum aftermarket block" don't really go together..

My advice?... I don't mind "out of the box" thinking.. but..

Don't try and re-invent the wheel, we have all been there and done that. Spend the money on a solid bottom end, and the best heads and porting you can afford.. that's where the power is. Gains from mushroom lifters, and/or larger diamerter lifters, with aggressive ramp flat tappet cams, are minimal at best, and the cost/benefit ratio is really bad.

In your case, the best wizard magic you can do with the cam and lifters, might be worth 1/4 of what a good set of ported aluminum heads would produce in power gain.

You would only go to those lengths if you were running a class with restrictive rules, and had to get everything you could out of a particular combo.

JW

 

I hear ya on the maxing out a combo. For me, all that's left is to get a high dollar crank I'm not willing to spend the big money on a crank in a stock block application. Aftermarket block will cure my ills so that's what the savings are being accumulated for.

Just looking to see if we can "improve" in an area where Buicks are waaaaayy behind other brands.... Expense. I don't need a larger lifter or a bigger cam. I want the roller lifters for their friction reduction, not worrying about "zinc oils" and other reasons. I was more thinking a bushing that covered the main galley and opening the hole up to accept a bushing for the .842 lifter. Unshrouded Chevy lifters are lighter and plentiful. Only asking to see if a setu could be done that in the end would allow the Buick community to take another step towards modern tech(roller cams, even small ones in hydraulic applications are pretty much the norm now) and save money too.


PS: I always think outside the box. I was running nitrous when everybody was giving the "OMG, your gonna blow it up." speech to me 20 years ago at the Nats when I was told I had to stay all motor. I didn't bother racing and just had a great time just spectating. Same motor is still running and has been upgraded as I go and is in my current car.